User talk:Rapta/Archive 6
__TOC__ E/any GoI Water Elementalist Ill put GoLE in the main bar but why do you keep changing it?-- [[User:Hamstorm|'HAMSTORM']] :Hm? — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 22:58, 19 October 2007 (CEST) User:Hyperion`/Rt/Mo WoR Support Rit Guessing the reason for the move was similar builds. Can you clarify for me? — Hyperion` // talk 03:07, 21 October 2007 (CEST) :Yeah, and I didn't want it to be deleted, so I moved it to your namespace for you. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 22:02, 22 October 2007 (CEST) ::Ok thanks. Not sure why people were so reluctant to vote on it though... — Hyperion` // talk 05:54, 23 October 2007 (CEST) General Interrupter The General Interrupter build was a compilation build that was to span all 3 campaigns and the most general version of an interrupter for each. By removing BHA (even though someone else has created this double as the BHA ranger build - essentially the burning ranger with the elite switched) you effectively have made the "general" interrupter build now too specific (as well as excluding Factions) and not all inclusive as it was intended (same as the "general" barrage build). I suggest you either split out each type of interrupter that uses a different elite or combine them all the way it was with alternate skill options (like those listed on the current BHA ranger page) and eliminate the BHA version. Currently, I don't like that you changed it without discussing it first as I see it as a large change to the build page. As a side note - though I know it wasn't you - I also notice the Choking Gas variant was removed as well. Perhaps it is best to split it after all since many don't like the compilation as much as they used to. -- ''Vallen Frostweaver'' 00:18, 26 October 2007 (CEST) :There is no need for any "compilation build" on this wiki. Build pages should consist of single, well-thought out bars. Having more than one main bar in a build page undermines the Vetting system, which is designed to vet a single build, not one of these "compilation builds". These "compilation builds" you're referring to are located in the Guides section. If you want, I'll figure out what to do with the current, outdated skill bars. If not, feel free and edit the existing page as you see fit, as long as anything you add don't violate PW:WELL, such as the addition of a variant main bar that is covered in an existing build. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 00:30, 26 October 2007 (CEST) ::Well the compilation that is the general interrupter build is an old one and at the time of conception it eliminated over a dozen different builds that were duplicating information on GWiki. Now-a-days it's outdated when compared to current rules and standards and wasn't changed much even after the vetting of the current vetting system. I guess no one ever got around to updating/splitting/deleting it since the vetting system was put in place. -- ''Vallen Frostweaver'' 05:37, 27 October 2007 (CEST) :::Well, we could always put the Magebane and Punishing bars through the vetting process if you want. However, as far as PvE goes, it would probably end up in the same place. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:01, 28 October 2007 (CET) "Suicide Rit"? In the Rt/A Spirit of the Assassin build ratings section, you say "I'll stick with my assassin, I'd rather not play suicide-rit". This doesn't make any sense - Not only does that build have more armor than an assassin (75 compared to a regular assassin's 70) but it most likely has more health too because of Vital Weapon. What did you mean by "Suicide-Rit"?Stoneraven 21:04, 29 October 2007 (CET) :Exactly what it states. One that kills his/herself. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 22:06, 29 October 2007 (CET) ::Then why would you "stick with your assassin"? Would that not be more suicidal than taking the Ritualist with more Armor and Health? Or are you implying that you would rather play Even-More-Suicidal-Assassin instead of Suicide-Rit?Stoneraven 01:23, 30 October 2007 (CET) :::It's a choice between playing a Ritualist, be bad at the game and die, and playing an Assassin and be somewhat good. I prefer the latter. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 22:00, 30 October 2007 (CET) ::::So how is an assassin with MORE armor and MORE Health with a base damage of 55-60+ plus attack chains inferior to an assassin with less armor, less health, and less damage? You're not explaining yourself.Stoneraven 20:52, 1 November 2007 (CET) :::::No, you're not explaining why a build that is bad should be voted good. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 21:10, 1 November 2007 (CET) ::::::Also, to quote from PvX:VETTING: "If a user feels that an unwarranted rating has been given to a build, he or she may contact the voter in question and ask them to explain or elaborate their rating on the build's discussion page. Note that all discussion about votes and their reasons takes place on the build's discussion page, not'' on the voter's talk page'. However, a short message on the voter's talk page in order to draw his attention on the discussion is acceptable." -- 'Wizardboy777(T/ /Sysop) 00:32, 2 November 2007 (CET) Just to throw this out there, the build itself does not have much, if any, more health than an assassin, since it takes a 75 point loss on the sup rune. The armor is moot, and maintaining the weapons spell is annoying. I tend to agree with rapta, the build is a gimmick, and not a very good one.Bob fregman 03:49, 6 November 2007 (CET) a gift — Skakid9090 04:49, 31 October 2007 (CET) :lolwut? — [[User:Rapta|'''Rapta]] 19px (talk| ) 21:13, 31 October 2007 (CET) ::http://www.pvxwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Rapta&action=edit&section=2 — Skakid9090 21:17, 31 October 2007 (CET) Build:A/D Deadly Winds Now.. I understand vote balancing... but I also understand that that's not part of real vetting. If you're not trying to balance, I'd suggest really rethinking your rating on effectiveness, at the very least. You're practically claiming all Assacasters are useless. cedave ( _buildpage) 23:26, 2 November 2007 (CET) :No, it's just bad in comparison. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 01:57, 3 November 2007 (CET) ::Because clearly Enchantment removal sucks when combined with spamming the same skill over and over again? >.> cedave ( _buildpage) 02:00, 3 November 2007 (CET) :::In that case, yes, it's bad. Chances are you'll be removing an attunement or mending anyways. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 02:01, 3 November 2007 (CET) :::Read it carefully.. All enchantments get removed. (Remove the pvx if you like. Just put it up here for ease of access.) cedave ( _buildpage) 02:05, 3 November 2007 (CET) ::::As I said, chances are you'll be removing Mending or an Attunement anyways. Unless you're facing some sort of moron who's completely bad at the game (Earth tank comes to mind). In that case, any build would work. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 02:06, 3 November 2007 (CET) :::::Because monk protection skills clearly aren't enchantments.. nor is Mystic Regeneration. Same goes for most Dervish skills and several other monk skills. And MMs using Aura of the Lich. The list goes on... cedave ( _buildpage) 02:09, 3 November 2007 (CET) ::::::Also, I'd like to mention that Wind prayers is great for a nice heal, and ToF can remove Feigned Neutrality from your beloved Assacaster build... cedave ( _buildpage) 02:11, 3 November 2007 (CET) :::::::Don't place BS assumptions on my talk page please. In all truth, it's not that I care about the existing ones. It's that this one is bad in comparison. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 02:12, 3 November 2007 (CET) ::::::::Anyways, keep this on the build's talk page. Not here. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 02:14, 3 November 2007 (CET) Just to let you know. I'm getting off for the night, so I won't be able to get back to anything for at least a couple hours. Just thought I'd let you know so you didn't feel as if I'd decided to ignore you. cedave ( _buildpage) 02:24, 3 November 2007 (CET) :Appreciate it. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 02:24, 3 November 2007 (CET) Admin Noticeboard That was kind of cheap, archiving it before I have a chance to reply. And tell me, why does an on-topic discussion about a vote belong on the build's page? I might be wrong, but it seems to me the build's talkpage is for talking about the build, not people's votes on it. Also, it wasn't resolved. Don't archive it like it was. --71.229.204.25 04:05, 6 November 2007 (CET) :It was a discussion about "how to blind". It's irrelevant. And in addition, it was a discussion on the build. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:06, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::The whole thread was a discussion on the build. Almost every thread on the AN is a discussion on the build in question, because that's why issues are brought there - votes and comments are at odds with the build's purpose or effectiveness. And two posts were about 'how to blind', that's it. The issue was not resolved, therefore it isn't to be removed from the AN. --Pentient Engine Grammaticus 04:09, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::No, almost every thread on the AN is about voters without contributions or no comment. The issue, from the admin standpoint, is resolved. It is no longer an issue concerning the admin. This time could be better spent trying to start up a discussion on the build's talk page. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:11, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::When I said 'threads', I meant more than one post and one reply. And I'll do that. --71.229.204.25 04:12, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::Good. You probably should have specified that then. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:13, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::I'll be sure to be more precise in the future so you don't have to pause for a moment and consider the incongruity between what I said and the reality of things. :) --71.229.204.25 04:16, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::::That's a good habit to get into. It's nice when people understand you. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:18, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::::Yes, yes it is. It's also pretty nice when they try to understand you instead of just assuming you're stupid. --71.229.204.25 04:21, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::::::We all know no one does that on this Wiki. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:23, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::::::Don't you mean: we all know no one is not stupid on this wiki? --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 04:24, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::::::::Yes. Maybe. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:25, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::::::::I don't understand.[[User:Teh Uber Pwnzer|''' — Teh Uber Pwnzer']] 04:26, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::::::::::That's good. This discussion was pretty fail to begin with. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:29, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::::::::::I actually do understand. I just fail at sarcasm. I was just going along with Edru's "all people on this wiki are stoopid" thing.[[User:Teh Uber Pwnzer|' — Teh Uber Pwnzer']] 04:34, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::::::::::::My point about this being a bad conversation still stands. =) — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:35, 6 November 2007 (CET) You guys don't like "Reset Indent" much, do you? cedave ( _buildpage) 05:18, 6 November 2007 (CET) :Typing a bazillion : is easier. :P --image:GEO-logo.png[[user:Jioruji_Derako| 'Ĵ'ĩôřũĵĩ 'Đ'ēŗāķō.'>']][[user talk:Jioruji Derako|.cнаt^']] 05:44, 6 November 2007 (CET) Generous Was Tsungrai Going over the ratings of Ancestors Haze, I notice you said GWT starved energy. I don't see where it manages to do this. :s. 'Unreal Havoc' 16:11, 6 November 2007 (CET) :Lack of a staff/wand+offhand kills energy. Lord Belar 22:34, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::It has a Staff, didn't you read the equipment section? 'Unreal Havoc' 23:08, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::Item spell makes you lose weapon bonus. - Rawrawr 23:12, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::Is this really worth explaining? — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 23:19, 6 November 2007 (CET) :::::Enlightened masses vote better? Someone has to teach him eventually. Lord Belar 23:22, 6 November 2007 (CET) ::::::That's why I always try to stress explaining votes very simply; don't just assume that the player knows everything you know. You cut down on the number of comments along the lines of "why did you vote so low on my Warrior/Monk build? It heals better then other Warriors!". --image:GEO-logo.png[[user:Jioruji_Derako| 'Ĵ'ĩôřũĵĩ 'Đ'ēŗāķō.'>']][[user talk:Jioruji Derako|.cнаt''^]] 23:41, 6 November 2007 (CET) I still don't quite get it. :s Can someone just explain it to me properly? Unreal Havoc 04:09, 7 November 2007 (CET) :When you hold a bundle/item, you are not wielding your weapon. Lord Belar 04:10, 7 November 2007 (CET) ::And that results in you not receiving that +27 or whatever from your staff or focus. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 04:11, 7 November 2007 (CET) But when you drop it you get it back right? If so how is that a problem? Unreal Havoc 04:13, 7 November 2007 (CET) :But you can't have both at once. Lord Belar 04:14, 7 November 2007 (CET) ::OK, understood, but you're not really supposed to. You drop the ashes when you shadowstep, and when you use it to heal you drop them straight away to quick heal. I've never really found this to be a problem to be honest, seriously. I'll change the usage to make note of it, thankyou. Unreal Havoc 04:17, 7 November 2007 (CET) :::Meh, why not simply drop the Ashes from the skillbar though? I think a Resurrection Signet or Death Pact Signet would be a better option; save yourself attribute points too. --image:GEO-logo.png[[user:Jioruji_Derako| Ĵ'ĩôřũĵĩ 'Đēŗāķō.>']][[user talk:Jioruji Derako|.cнаt^']] 05:14, 7 November 2007 (CET) ::::Thanks, for the feedback. I wish more people would do this on the builds talk page so I can improve it. Added edits as we speak. :) Unreal Havoc 14:24, 7 November 2007 (CET) :::::I'd post there, but I'm lazy. :P Perhaps I'll give the build a test and a rate later. --image:GEO-logo.png[[user:Jioruji_Derako| Ĵ'ĩôřũĵĩ 'Đēŗāķō.>']][[user talk:Jioruji Derako|.cнаt^']] 18:28, 7 November 2007 (CET)